BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

William M. Farmer

William M. Farmer appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Logic in Computer ScienceMathematical Softwaremath.LOmath.RASoftware EngineeringSymbolic Computation

Catalog footprint

What is connected

9works
6topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

9 published item(s)

preprint2020arXiv

Leveraging the Information Contained in Theory Presentations

A theorem prover without an extensive library is much less useful to its potential users. Algebra, the study of algebraic structures, is a core component of such libraries. Algebraic theories also are themselves structured, the study of which was started as Universal Algebra. Various constructions (homomorphism, term algebras, products, etc) and their properties are both universal and constructive. Thus they are ripe for being automated. Unfortunately, current practice still requires library builders to write these by hand. We first highlight specific redundancies in libraries of existing systems. Then we describe a framework for generating these derived concepts from theory definitions. We demonstrate the usefulness of this framework on a test library of 227 theories.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

The Space of Mathematical Software Systems -- A Survey of Paradigmatic Systems

Mathematical software systems are becoming more and more important in pure and applied mathematics in order to deal with the complexity and scalability issues inherent in mathematics. In the last decades we have seen a cambric explosion of increasingly powerful but also diverging systems. To give researchers a guide to this space of systems, we devise a novel conceptualization of mathematical software that focuses on five aspects: inference covers formal logic and reasoning about mathematical statements via proofs and models, typically with strong emphasis on correctness; computation covers algorithms and software libraries for representing and manipulating mathematical objects, typically with strong emphasis on efficiency; concretization covers generating and maintaining collections of mathematical objects conforming to a certain pattern, typically with strong emphasis on complete enumeration; narration covers describing mathematical contexts and relations, typically with strong emphasis on human readability; finally, organization covers representing mathematical contexts and objects in machine-actionable formal languages, typically with strong emphasis on expressivity and system interoperability. Despite broad agreement that an ideal system would seamlessly integrate all these aspects, research has diversified into families of highly specialized systems focusing on a single aspect and possibly partially integrating others, each with their own communities, challenges, and successes. In this survey, we focus on the commonalities and differences of these systems from the perspective of a future multi-aspect system.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2016arXiv

Incorporating Quotation and Evaluation into Church's Type Theory: Syntax and Semantics

${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory that includes quotation and evaluation operators that are similar to quote and eval in the Lisp programming language. With quotation and evaluation it is possible to reason in ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$ about the interplay of the syntax and semantics of expressions and, as a result, to formalize syntax-based mathematical algorithms. We present the syntax and semantics of ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$ and give several examples that illustrate the usefulness of having quotation and evaluation in ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$. We do not give a proof system for ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$, but we do sketch what a proof system could look like.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Andrews' Type Theory with Undefinedness

${\cal Q}_0$ is an elegant version of Church's type theory formulated and extensively studied by Peter B. Andrews. Like other traditional logics, ${\cal Q}_0$ does not admit undefined terms. The "traditional approach to undefinedness" in mathematical practice is to treat undefined terms as legitimate, nondenoting terms that can be components of meaningful statements. ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}$ is a modification of Andrews' type theory ${\cal Q}_0$ that directly formalizes the traditional approach to undefinedness. This paper presents ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}$ and proves that the proof system of ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}$ is sound and complete with respect to its semantics which is based on Henkin-style general models. The paper's development of ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}$ closely follows Andrews' development of ${\cal Q}_0$ to clearly delineate the differences between the two systems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Frameworks for Reasoning about Syntax that Utilize Quotation and Evaluation

It is often useful, if not necessary, to reason about the syntactic structure of an expression in an interpreted language (i.e., a language with a semantics). This paper introduces a mathematical structure called a syntax framework that is intended to be an abstract model of a system for reasoning about the syntax of an interpreted language. Like many concrete systems for reasoning about syntax, a syntax framework contains a mapping of expressions in the interpreted language to syntactic values that represent the syntactic structures of the expressions; a language for reasoning about the syntactic values; a mechanism called quotation to refer to the syntactic value of an expression; and a mechanism called evaluation to refer to the value of the expression represented by a syntactic value. A syntax framework provides a basis for integrating reasoning about the syntax of the expressions with reasoning about what the expressions mean. The notion of a syntax framework is used to discuss how quotation and evaluation can be built into a language and to define what quasiquotation is. Several examples of syntax frameworks are presented.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Realms: A Structure for Consolidating Knowledge about Mathematical Theories

Since there are different ways of axiomatizing and developing a mathematical theory, knowledge about a such a theory may reside in many places and in many forms within a library of formalized mathematics. We introduce the notion of a realm as a structure for consolidating knowledge about a mathematical theory. A realm contains several axiomatizations of a theory that are separately developed. Views interconnect these developments and establish that the axiomatizations are equivalent in the sense of being mutually interpretable. A realm also contains an external interface that is convenient for users of the library who want to apply the concepts and facts of the theory without delving into the details of how the concepts and facts were developed. We illustrate the utility of realms through a series of examples. We also give an outline of the mechanisms that are needed to create and maintain realms.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Chiron: A Set Theory with Types, Undefinedness, Quotation, and Evaluation

Chiron is a derivative of von-Neumann-Bernays-Gödel (NBG) set theory that is intended to be a practical, general-purpose logic for mechanizing mathematics. Unlike traditional set theories such as Zermelo-Fraenkel (ZF) and NBG, Chiron is equipped with a type system, lambda notation, and definite and indefinite description. The type system includes a universal type, dependent types, dependent function types, subtypes, and possibly empty types. Unlike traditional logics such as first-order logic and simple type theory, Chiron admits undefined terms that result, for example, from a function applied to an argument outside its domain or from an improper definite or indefinite description. The most noteworthy part of Chiron is its facility for reasoning about the syntax of expressions. Quotation is used to refer to a set called a construction that represents the syntactic structure of an expression, and evaluation is used to refer to the value of the expression that a construction represents. Using quotation and evaluation, syntactic side conditions, schemas, syntactic transformations used in deduction and computation rules, and other such things can be directly expressed in Chiron. This paper presents the syntax and semantics of Chiron, some definitions and simple examples illustrating its use, a proof system for Chiron, and a notion of an interpretation of one theory of Chiron in another.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

The Formalization of Syntax-Based Mathematical Algorithms Using Quotation and Evaluation

Algorithms like those for differentiating functional expressions manipulate the syntactic structure of mathematical expressions in a mathematically meaningful way. A formalization of such an algorithm should include a specification of its computational behavior, a specification of its mathematical meaning, and a mechanism for applying the algorithm to actual expressions. Achieving these goals requires the ability to integrate reasoning about the syntax of the expressions with reasoning about what the expressions mean. A syntax framework is a mathematical structure that is an abstract model for a syntax reasoning system. It contains a mapping of expressions to syntactic values that represent the syntactic structures of the expressions; a language for reasoning about syntactic values; a quotation mechanism to refer to the syntactic value of an expression; and an evaluation mechanism to refer to the value of the expression represented by a syntactic value. We present and compare two approaches, based on instances of a syntax framework, to formalize a syntax-based mathematical algorithm in a formal theory T. In the first approach the syntactic values for the expressions manipulated by the algorithm are members of an inductive type in T, but quotation and evaluation are functions defined in the metatheory of T. In the second approach every expression in T is represented by a syntactic value, and quotation and evaluation are operators in T itself.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access